Ontario Regulation 455/09…

Ontario Regulation 455/09 appears to be directly related to the Toxic Reductions Act, 2009, which the government has already identified for repeal in a separate posting. Since this regulation is part of the Act, there seems to be some redundancy to posting this particular change again.

Still, the changes are worrying since the summary states: “We propose to no longer require facilities with existing toxics reduction plans to review those plans, and exempt certain facilities from all future planning and reporting obligations. This will remove unnecessary duplication with the federal program and reduce burden for industry.”

There will be NO duplication with the federal program because the federal Chemicals Management Plan only sets basic guidelines for lower levels of government to follow. Then, each province or territory is supposed to fine-tune the guidelines according to its own specific industrial profiles. Ottawa will NOT be monitoring Ontario’s industries directly.

Here’s what the federal Chemicals Management Plan states: “In Canada, every order of government plays a part in protecting against risks from chemical substances: municipalities, the PROVINCES and territories, and the federal government. The Government of Canada makes regulations and develops guidelines and objectives that apply across the whole country.” Then, the federal government expects lower tiers of government to follow and ENACT those guidelines, tailored to address specific industries within each province

The rather lax regulations within the Toxic Reductions Act, 2009, were supposed to prevent pollution and reduce the use and creation of toxic substances, while informing Ontarians about those substances. Industry was required to develop VOLUNTARY toxic reduction plans, and report publicly each year. Since plans were voluntary, it is no surprise the Toxic Reduction Program did not achieve meaningful reductions -- noted as one reason for its repeal. Voluntary participation should never be an option where regulation and oversight are required. (It would be interesting to see how many people would file tax returns if that exercise ever became voluntary.) As members of society (whether we are talking about individuals, companies, or the public service), there are obligations that bind us together as a society. One of those obligations must surely entail NOT releasing toxic substances that may result in costly (potentially long-term) damage and clean-ups, as well as increased medical costs for affected individuals. Those toxic substances must be understood, named, measured, monitored, and minimized through regulation.

I ask the government to re-consider this repeal. I believe it would be preferable for regulatory requirements within the Toxic Reductions Act, 2009, to be re-written, so it becomes a provincial regulatory framework. It is possible to protect health, AND create jobs while protecting the all-encompassing environment within which all human endeavours occur ... all at the same time. Often, regulatory discipline can help to improve an industry's performance. Sometimes, industry itself asks for regulatory measures so all participants will operate fairly on a level 'playing field'. There are a number of responsible companies in Ontario. By repealing this act, the province may inadvertently be 'inviting' some irresponsible 'players' who could tarnish an entire industry's reputation over time. Let's not give the 'bad apples' a foothold in Ontario just because they think they have a free pass to pollute in the absence of necessary regulatory oversight by the province.